Closing the Stable Door? A recent MDLP peer assist on handover and knowledge retention.
Image by John Lund
Is handover like shutting the gate when the horse has bolted? by Helen Gillman (IFAD)
Working in the knowledge management and organizational learning spheres of international development can be tremendously daunting because there is so much at stake. The same mistakes are repeated over and again when we fail to learn, rendering development initiatives less effective, or worse, harmful. All of this at considerable cost to the poor and vulnerable people we are meant to serve.
We know that knowledge, innovation and competence (both individual and organizational) are fundamental for effective development. However, managing knowledge for learning and continuous improvement and greater impact still often poses challenges in our organizations.
This is why one of the most valuable aspects of engaging in the Multi-Donor Learning Partnership for me is the opportunity to get together with peers from other development organizations to share experiences, throw around ideas and learn how to do better - all in a safe place where it is okay to say: “I don’t know” or “We need to do better” or “We need help”.
A recent peer assist organized by the MDLP was a great illustration of this.
A peer assist provides an opportunity to learn from the experience of others who have tackled similar challenges. The person or group with a “need” outline their challenge and then others who have a similar need, or have something to offer, share their experiences. I like them because I really enjoy discussing and learning from the experience of others - it is how I clarify my thoughts and ideas.
The topic of the peer assist was knowledge retention in development organizations. In my work as a KM practitioner, I have often been astounded by the lack of attention given to the risks associated with loss of valuable knowledge when people retire or leave the organization: all of that technical and institutional knowledge, know-how and unique experience that just walks out the door with some retirees especially, but not only.
With my team and the support of external experts, I had been working on a proposal to introduce approaches to knowledge retention in my organization, including an enhanced handover note template and some options for more in-depth handover processes. I already knew that management was keen to adopt a handover note template and make it compulsory during reassignment exercises and for staff leaving the organization. Although I had been looking at leading practice globally, I didn’t yet have a clear enough view on what other approaches may work best in my organization - in effect what was going to deliver good results, and get management support and staff buy-in.
The peer assist was a rich exchange that challenged my assumptions, and gave me some fantastic practical guidance. While most others in the group were facing similar challenges, the ideas that the discussion sparked helped me to give better shape to my own. Most importantly, those who spoke from their own experience (good and bad) contributed concrete examples, suggestions and lessons that I have used to add more substance to my proposals to management.
Take-aways from the Conversation
It was a long discussion and a lot was packed into it, but here are some of my main takeaways:
Balance supply and demand: what do people want to share, what do people want to know.
Sad to say - but not everyone’s knowledge is critical and unique. Put in place processes to identify when to use straightforward, administrative handover (contacts, documents, ongoing projects etc.) and when to invest time in approaches that tap into a person’s deep knowledge, experience and know-how.
Create “living” knowledge retention approaches and tools that incentivise continuous engagement, learning, knowledge sharing, collaboration and expertise development throughout an employee’s working life.
On-boarding: find 10 people with the most relevant experience and advise the new employee to go and interview them.
Rather than trying to “capture” retirees’ knowledge and know-how, tap into their willingness to share and remain engaged: encourage them to make time to answer questions, run training sessions, and especially to be available to younger people coming into the organization.
And a final provocation from Chris Collison that really struck a chord with me: “if we were better at liberating knowledge during a person’s working life, would we even need knowledge retention programmes?”